The aim of this study was to compare a third-generation
cementing procedure for glenoid components with a new technique
for cement pressurisation. In 20 pairs of scapulae, 20 keeled and
20 pegged glenoid components were implanted using either a third-generation
cementing technique (group 1) or a new pressuriser (group 2). Cement penetration
was measured by three-dimensional (3D) analysis of micro-CT scans.
The mean 3D depth of penetration of the cement was significantly
greater in group 2 (p <
0.001). The mean thickness of the cement
mantle for keeled glenoids was 2.50 mm (2.0 to 3.3) in group 1 and
5.18 mm (4.4 to 6.1) in group 2, and for pegged glenoids it was 1.72 mm
(0.9 to 2.3) in group 1 and 5.63 mm (3.6 to 6.4) in group 2. A cement
mantle <
2 mm was detected less frequently in group 2 (p <
0.001). Using the cement pressuriser the proportion of cement mantles
<
2 mm was significantly reduced compared with the third-generation
cementing technique.
We report the effectiveness of revision of total
elbow replacement by re-cementing. Between 1982 and 2004, 53 elbows
in 52 patients were treated with re-cementing of a total elbow replacement
into part or all of the existing cement mantle or into the debrided
host-bone interface, without the use of structural bone augmentation
or a custom prosthesis. The original implant revision was still
There is little information available at present regarding the mechanisms of failure of modern metallic radial head implants. Between 1998 and 2008, 44 consecutive patients (47 elbows) underwent removal of a failed metallic radial head replacement. In 13 patients (13 elbows) the initial operation had been undertaken within one week of a fracture of the radial head, at one to six weeks in seven patients (seven elbows) and more than six weeks (mean of 2.5 years (2 to 65 months)) in 22 patients (25 elbows). In the remaining two elbows the replacement was inserted for non-traumatic reasons. The most common indication for further surgery was painful loosening (31 elbows). Revision was undertaken for stiffness in 18 elbows, instability in nine, and deep infection in two. There were signs of over-lengthening of the radius in 11 elbows. Degenerative changes were found in all but one. Only three loose implants had been fixed with cement. Instability was not identified in any of the bipolar implants.
Our aim in this prospective study was to evaluate the outcome of total shoulder replacement in the treatment of young and middle-aged active patients with primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis. We reviewed 21 patients (21 shoulders) with a mean age of 55 years (37 to 60). The mean follow-up was seven years (5 to 9). The same anatomical, third-generation,
We describe the results of Copeland surface replacement shoulder arthroplasty using the mark III prosthesis in patients over 80 years of age. End-stage arthritis of the shoulder is a source of significant pain and debilitating functional loss in the elderly. An arthroplasty offers good relief of pain and may allow the patient to maintain independence. The risk-benefit ratio of shoulder replacement may be felt to be too high in an elderly age group, but there is no published evidence to support this theory. We have assessed whether the procedure was as reliable and safe as previously seen in a younger cohort of patients. Between 1993 and 2003, 213 Copeland surface replacement arthroplasty procedures were performed in our unit, of which 29 (13.6%) were undertaken in patients over the age of 80. This group of patients was followed up for a mean of 4.5 years (2.1 to 9.3). Their mean age was 84.3 years (81 to 93), the mean operating time was 40 minutes (30 to 45) and the mean in-patient stay was five days (2 to 21). There were no peri-operative deaths or significant complications. The mean Constant score adjusted for age and gender, improved from 15.1% to 77%. Copeland surface replacement shoulder arthroplasty may be performed with minimal morbidity and rapid rehabilitation in the elderly.
We studied retrospectively the results of revision arthroplasty of the elbow using a linked Coonrad-Morrey implant in 23 patients (24 elbows) after a mean follow-up period of 55 months. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Score, 19 elbows were satisfactory, nine were excellent and ten good. The median total score had improved from 35 points (20 to 75) before the primary arthroplasty to 85 points (40 to 100) at the latest follow-up. There was a marked relief of pain, but the range of movement showed no overall improvement. Two patients had a second revision because of infection and two for aseptic loosening. The estimated five-year survival rate of the prosthesis was 83.1% (95% confidence interval 61.1 to 93.3). Revision elbow arthroplasty using the Coonrad-Morrey implant provided satisfactory results but with complications occurring in 13 cases.